![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]Shown: posts 1 to 19 of 19. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by poser938 on May 23, 2012, at 16:52:40
from the days of MAOI's and tricyclics, the main advantage they have with newer meds is it is much more difficult to overdose and have a fatal reaction. besides that, the older meds could work as well if not better than the newer medications they have out. and now they're saying that the future is in Triple Reuptake Inhibitors. i just think it's a joke. it is nothing more than combining the actions of medications we already have out today.
article on triple reuptake inhibitors being the future.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2701280/
Posted by SLS on May 23, 2012, at 17:35:37
In reply to is anyone actually impressed with drug companies?, posted by poser938 on May 23, 2012, at 16:52:40
> from the days of MAOI's and tricyclics, the main advantage they have with newer meds is it is much more difficult to overdose and have a fatal reaction. besides that, the older meds could work as well if not better than the newer medications they have out. and now they're saying that the future is in Triple Reuptake Inhibitors. i just think it's a joke. it is nothing more than combining the actions of medications we already have out today.
I really don't think that it is a joke.
I don't think we can consider Wellbutrin to be a DA reuptake inhibitor to the same degree as are amineptine and nomifensine, two drugs that were discontinued.
Which other drugs do you consider to be DA reuptake inhibitors that we could use in combination treatments?
> article on triple reuptake inhibitors being the future.
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2701280/I am impressed by the personages and technology employed in the research and development areas of pharmaceutical companies. I am less impressed with their business decisions and marketing campaigns. If it makes you feel any better, the few triple reuptake inhibitor projects that were listed on the http://www.neurotransmitter.net/newdrugs.html site have disappeared. Perhaps they were abandoned. Do you know of any that are still in the pipeline?
- Scott
Posted by SLS on May 23, 2012, at 17:43:10
In reply to is anyone actually impressed with drug companies?, posted by poser938 on May 23, 2012, at 16:52:40
The design, synthesis, and research into the development of fluoxetine (Prozac) makes for an interesting story:
www.jiaci.org/issues/vol16s1/5.pdf
- Scott
Posted by poser938 on May 24, 2012, at 13:08:31
In reply to Re: is anyone actually impressed with drug companies? » poser938, posted by SLS on May 23, 2012, at 17:35:37
ritalin is one medication that inhibits the reuptake of dopamine and it can work within in minutes to put you in a good mood. maybe i'm out of touch, but i dont see a problem with someone taking a medication that makes them feel good.. rather than a med that numbs them and takes away their passion to go out and live. this is the reaction that most people have to serotonin increasing meds.. which make up about 80% of the current antidepressants.
and then i ran accross triple reuptake inhibitors that are said to be the future of antidepressants. the only difference i see is a doc being mre willing to prescribe this dopamine increasing med because it is labeled as an "antidepressant" and not a stimulant. this is a pretty significant difference, though, if you can finally get a doctor to prescribe you somehting that increases your passion for life.. but we have that with ritalin. then we have an even stronger med that works on dopamine called adderall, and vyvanse too. and if you dont like DRI's you can go with selegiline or emsam if you want to inhibit mao-a and mao-b. my 1st set of meds were cymbalta and adderall. these 2 meds had the 3 main neurotransmitters covered that they try to increase.
maybe my experience with psychiatric medications has a lot to do with my view of how little we have acheived in the past 25 years.. or even the past 50 years. and my experience with psychiatrists and medical doctors acting like these meds are perfect, with no possibility of screwing you up long-term. and i know i'm not the only one that has had an experience like this.
unnaturally forcing your brain to do something that it wasn't designed to do can cause things to haywire, and it could possibly be permanent (like in my case) and since i had a bad reaction to these meds i am told i am delusional by doctors.anyway.. i just cant wait until they are done milking this monoamine hypothesis for all it has got. i'm not expecting anything truly interesting from drug companies for at least 50 years. sure, todays approach works for some people, but then it has ruined some peoples lives.
Posted by bleauberry on May 24, 2012, at 18:53:04
In reply to Re: is anyone actually impressed with drug companies?, posted by poser938 on May 24, 2012, at 13:08:31
I am impressed with the work and intention but not impressed with the results.
Posted by SLS on May 24, 2012, at 19:28:42
In reply to Re: is anyone actually impressed with drug companies?, posted by bleauberry on May 24, 2012, at 18:53:04
> I am impressed with the work and intention but not impressed with the results.
I'll take what I can get.
- Scott
Posted by bleauberry on May 25, 2012, at 7:03:19
In reply to Re: is anyone actually impressed with drug companies? » bleauberry, posted by SLS on May 24, 2012, at 19:28:42
Yeah me too. Unfortunately we have to discard the majority of choices we can get, but with enough trial and error I think all of us can find one or two meds that truly help improve the quality of our lives, despite they may have shortcomings and despite they may not provide remission....much better than nothing!
I think my primary gripe with the pharm companies is their ignorance of history. There are plant medicines with solid reputations of over 2000 years, and literally hundreds of clinical studies on them.....totally ignored. Probably because they are not patendable. They are chasing the money, while we are chasing healing, and the two are not always going in the same direction.
> > I am impressed with the work and intention but not impressed with the results.
>
> I'll take what I can get.
>
>
> - Scott
Posted by novelagent on May 26, 2012, at 9:47:23
In reply to is anyone actually impressed with drug companies?, posted by poser938 on May 23, 2012, at 16:52:40
the newer antipsychotics, like the once-monthly Invega Sustenna I take, saved me from a life of insanity. So yeah, zi'm impressed.
Also, emsam is an MAOI-B, which gives very good results without, at the 6 mg dose, causing the same MAOI A side effects. Latuda, if you prefer oral antipsychotics, is out,
I took oral selegiline for a few months, and it gave me instant remission (although I also took it with DLPA, under the hypothesis this combo would overcome the lag time antidepressants have). I had depression for a year and a half, and craved sleep all thst time, before tsking it. I didn't need to take it after a few months.
Keep in mind remission from depression requires also investing in some serious life changes, some seriously tolerant and loving friends, and a huge heap of structure in one's life-- structure few on this board are likely willing to insist for themselves.
the meds go half way. CBT finishes the race.
> from the days of MAOI's and tricyclics, the main advantage they have with newer meds is it is much more difficult to overdose and have a fatal reaction. besides that, the older meds could work as well if not better than the newer medications they have out. and now they're saying that the future is in Triple Reuptake Inhibitors. i just think it's a joke. it is nothing more than combining the actions of medications we already have out today.
>
> article on triple reuptake inhibitors being the future.
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2701280/
Posted by Zyprexa on May 27, 2012, at 3:54:08
In reply to is anyone actually impressed with drug companies?, posted by poser938 on May 23, 2012, at 16:52:40
I am. Just for inventing zyprexa. Just wish meds were not so expensive. I know they have to make up the money for reseach. but do they have to charge $2000 for brand zyprexa?
Posted by novelagent on May 28, 2012, at 8:52:35
In reply to Re: is anyone actually impressed with drug companies?, posted by Zyprexa on May 27, 2012, at 3:54:08
> I am. Just for inventing zyprexa. Just wish meds were not so expensive. I know they have to make up the money for reseach. but do they have to charge $2000 for brand zyprexa?
>
seriously? I know insurance pays at a discounted rate, but even my Invega Sustenna injection each month is only like $1200 a month for my insurance. At $2,000, you should be enjoying that nice brand name Zyprexa injection...
Posted by Phil on May 28, 2012, at 13:22:24
In reply to is anyone actually impressed with drug companies?, posted by poser938 on May 23, 2012, at 16:52:40
I have respect for the scientists / researchers. I think that they would give anything to "cure mental illness." I think that there's competition between the people to get there first.
If they found a magic cure all, that would give the suits a predicament. Say it's one pill for one month and you're done. How much could they get for that one pill? Let the spin begin.
I have always had trouble with US prices of meds vs other countries. Do we look like we can afford a higher price in the US.
And, Big Pharma has the highest profit margin of any industry. I used to work retail and those store mgmt would have killed for those margins. If they are so over-priced just to fund research, then why are their profit margins so high. They spend it all on research, great. You still have the highest gross margins
If I was Congressman(I'm too ethical)from my first day till my last I'd go after Big Pharma. It's like the elephant in the living room.
I could write forever on those people.
They aren't funding research, they're paying lawyers and settling lawsuits.
Posted by Zyprexa on May 29, 2012, at 3:48:08
In reply to Re: is anyone actually impressed with drug companies?, posted by novelagent on May 28, 2012, at 8:52:35
Yes, for 15mg zyprexa 3 months its 2000. I take 10mg generic and its 1000 90 days. Still think thats too high, for a generic? The brand is not that much more, 10mg zyprexa 1500. With medicare, the 2 come out to the same price. I always wondered if the insurance companies paid the full price the pharmacy says insurance paid?
Posted by Phil on May 29, 2012, at 10:05:41
In reply to Re: is anyone actually impressed with drug companies? » novelagent, posted by Zyprexa on May 29, 2012, at 3:48:08
I don't think that insurance companies pay what the pharmacy prints out. There was massive discrepancy on what they paid for my hospital stays compared to what I would have had to pay. I'm sure that drugs are the same.
Posted by Zyprexa on May 29, 2012, at 21:13:13
In reply to Re: is anyone actually impressed with drug companies? » Zyprexa, posted by Phil on May 29, 2012, at 10:05:41
The thing is they admit to the descrepency with doc visit, labs and dental visits. But never have seen anything with pills.
Posted by Phil on May 30, 2012, at 7:10:02
In reply to Re: is anyone actually impressed with drug companies? » Phil, posted by Zyprexa on May 29, 2012, at 21:13:13
I think this is still in effect.
But the drug companies got Congress to make it illegal to negotiate for lower prices under Medicare"
Posted by Zyprexa on May 30, 2012, at 19:41:14
In reply to Re: is anyone actually impressed with drug companies? » Zyprexa, posted by Phil on May 30, 2012, at 7:10:02
I guess that is why they have the medication gap. This way the patients pay for the higher prices.
Posted by TiredofChemicals on May 31, 2012, at 0:17:41
In reply to is anyone actually impressed with drug companies?, posted by poser938 on May 23, 2012, at 16:52:40
> from the days of MAOI's and tricyclics, the main advantage they have with newer meds is it is much more difficult to overdose and have a fatal reaction. besides that, the older meds could work as well if not better than the newer medications they have out. and now they're saying that the future is in Triple Reuptake Inhibitors. i just think it's a joke. it is nothing more than combining the actions of medications we already have out today.
>
> article on triple reuptake inhibitors being the future.
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2701280/
^^^^Tough question.
I gave up on psychiatric chemicals after ten years of failed results, with nearly every anti-depressant available at the time. I kinda' felt like a "hamster in a wheel", on the merry-go-round of trial and error, for ten years of psychiatric, chemical treatment.
However, I have recently found some relief from some muscle spasms (that I, coincidentally developed while taking psychiatric chemicals) in the form of Lyrica.
I was prescribed Lyrica for some nueropathic pain I was experiencing after I recently broke a leg.
I cannot say for sure that psychiatric chemicals were the cause of my muscle spasms. I have recently learned that muscle spasms may be caused by physical, over-exertion. I was definitely pushing myself physically during the time I was taking psychiatric chemicals.
I believe that the Lyrica is affecting my mood as, I feel I am overly angry at times. There are clear warnings for people with psychiatric issues while taking Lyrica. There is even a warning that it may cause a person to become suicidal.
Anyways, hopefully I can remain cognisant of my mental state and not spiral out of control.
I am very much enjoying the relief from the muscle spasms.So, from me, I give a positive vote. (Even though I found my relief by accident).
I still hold reservation (in regards to drug companies) for my decade long failure with psychiatric chemicals to treat my "condition(s)".
I'm tired, I'll quit now.*)
Posted by xean on June 2, 2012, at 14:43:05
In reply to Re: is anyone actually impressed with drug companies?, posted by TiredofChemicals on May 31, 2012, at 0:17:41
drug companies have saved my life. before the medications I was in and out of psych wards and had numerous suicide attempts. I hope they continue to alter the medications to have less side affects and increase their form of actions. I see nothing wrong in altering them to have the same affects while zeroing in on the chemicals that work. One thing that I think needs worked on is the cost of the medications. This is just my opinion. I take Latuda and Cymbalta and they work great for me.
Posted by topcatclr on June 7, 2012, at 10:29:28
In reply to Re: is anyone actually impressed with drug companies?, posted by xean on June 2, 2012, at 14:43:05
Been on Cymbalta a few years. Best med ever. Could not live well without it!
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.